How many of you believe in Ghosts and why? I assure you that

Ghosts aren't real and your second hypothesis states that if they were that they could have complex and rational thought and be able to interact with the tangible world

>>18840714
Scifag here, (I don't actually visit /sci/, I've just studied science for 14 years), I'll tell you my opinion of "Ghosts".

I lived in a "Haunted" house. 100%. Things moved around, "people" were seen, unexplained noises were heard. This went on for 10 years. We all knew about it, accepted it, and ignored it desu. There were dozens of witnesses, and imo it's proof of "something". It's the reason I turned to Science.

I heard a comedian once say.. "If ghosts are dead people, why do they wear clothes? Did their clothes die too?".. and it changed my whole opinion on ghosts.

I believe that what people see as "ghosts" aren't actually a real phenomena, and are most likely imaginary. You can't photograph them. It's why one person sees something and others don't. My guess is it's an electrical phenomena that somehow affects the brain causing visions. 'Why' is a question for phycisists.

As to why objects move by themselves, (which I've witnessed with my own eyes), I believe it's literally Telekinesis, and related to what we call "The Observer Effect" where particles are influenced by a person merely by looking at them. I believe that in certain situations, probably moments of shock/anxiety, a person can affect objects without knowing how.

Fuck knows. That's all just my wild theory. All I know is that I've seen 2 ghosts and "something" is real. After 14 years, Science still has no answers.

>>18840986
>*physicists

File: 55a46233bba2733b2d083aef4c7077c1 (1).jpg (26KB, 420x300px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 420x300px

>>18840714
Well think about all the "fake" evidence of ghosts. If you were to see something real, would you believe it?

>>18840714
Honestly, I believe in residual energy left behind by traumatized people that is so intense it can manifest itself. I don't think that they are thinking feeling souls left behind though. Just echos.

There are 2 types of spirits - those that are crossed over and those that are not.

those that are not crossed over are not able to have as complex a thought process as those that are crossed over. Those that are not crossed over are sort of like zombies. Those that have an indomitable will, who could possibly prove spirits existence are relegated to limbo. It's just a place where you can't interact with anyone, where it is dark, and where you are deaf, blind, and mute.

Spirits don't move objects or prove that they are there, unless they want to. It takes a lot of energy. Crossed over spirits have a code of ethics that they have to follow. This prevents them from doing anything that could harm a living soul. However, they can help humans.

In the world, there are about 150,000 humans that have the power to hear, feel, communicate, see, and touch ghosts. To those people, the existence of the spirit is proven on a daily basis.

Asking a spirit that is basically a zombie to perform a scientifically accurate test won't work.

If you really want to see spirits, start fucking around with a Ouija board. I don't think that spirits like to prove themselves to large crowds. They may be shy or have other goals in mind.

>>18840986
Shame that after 14 years of science you still don't understand the implications of quantum mechanics and you spout deepak chopra tier misunderstandings of the 'observer effect'.

>>18841053

I mean what also gives it away is the "14 years of science." I've never met a biologist, chemist, physicist, engineer, etc. say, "Yeah, I've been doing science for 14 years. My profession is science."

Also, on topic, ghosts/paranormal/etc. is all bullshit. The brain is a hell of a drug, especially one with mental health problems, and people looooove to tell stories.

I want to believe though.

>>18840714
people see something. that's all i know.

if u accept that u cannot or havent seen anything it means only a few humans can relate and thus relay these phenomena. We really have no idea what it is but fear makes it hard too. If you believe in ghost, you will either have or seek out these mediums but if you don't believe it will all be bs. maybe it is.

>>18840986
do you think perhaps the dead maybe trying to manifest more in a psychic way, or its more just a function of the mind?

I have a couple theories but theyre really under developed

Ghosts aren't corporeal so you can't see them or detect them in any way. They don't give off heat or move objects. They're spirits. And if you believe in ghosts you also have to believe in God.

Great responses guys. Keep them coming please.

>>18841053
>deepak chopra tier misunderstandings of the 'observer effect'.

Not at all. There are hundreds of versions of the copenhagen interpretation. Whether mine differs from yours is another debate, I simply gave my loose hypothesis of what I experienced.

>>18841070
You're a retard.

>studied science for 14 years
I'm not a physicists, nor do I claim to be one. I have no qualifications, besides gcse, in any scientific group. I'm merely interested in "science", whether it be Physics, Chemistry, Cosmology or Biology.. I seek knowledge on all subjects and attempt to gain a general understanding. In order to understand one subject you need to have some knowledge of the other. If you knew anything about Physics you'd know this.

Fuck off back to >>>/r9k/

>>18841517
I know a lot more than you do about it dipshit. I have a masters degree in physics and I've been teaching it for 12 years. There isn't a SINGLE fucking physicist in the world that mistakes a quantum effect for a macroscopic one. This I can fucking guarantee you. This is the misinterpretation you share with deepak chopra. If you had a proper education in physics you'd understand this - but you've clearly just picked shit up from the internet. You showed you're arse mate - there's no coming back from that.

Why don't YOU fuck off back to the joe rogan experience.

>>18842066
>You showed you're arse mate
> I have a masters degree in physics and I've been teaching it for 12 years

Pick one.

>>18842108
That doesn't even make sense! Haha. Not unless you'e nothing left but to go to picking me up on my grammar... in which case of course I will concede. My inability to correct an autocorrected word means my degree is invalid - you can now affect things by looking at them.

Physics 0
Internet faggot 1

>Why if some Ghosts are powerful enough to move objects, why hasn't one thought to actually say 'Hey, we're real, see???'

That's fucking dumb. Maybe they just want to do their thing, not "reveal themselves". This is similar to the "why don't the aliens land on the white house lawn?" argument, and just as stupid.

File: ayy.jpg (324KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 1680x1050px

I'll post ITT since the older ghost thread got delete.

My original comment:
>everyone in the world has a smartphone with a decent camera now, and it's conclusively proven there is nothing supernatural or paranormal out there.
Anon asks me:
>What do you make of this? REDACTED (fuck giving that channel more views)

It was 5 ghost clips compiled together, with 18.4 million views.

clip 1 explained:
>facebook com/IAmKennyBiddle/posts/595841540479212
clip 2 is edited out of a movie trailer:
>https://youtu.be/qe_5qfulIZM
clip 3 didn't mask his layers closely enough during the monitor static bit:
>picture related
clip 4 was faked by magicians for a tv show:
>kentonline co uk/canterbury/news/poltergeist-exposed-10611/
clip 5 faked for publicity
>https://youtu.be/anXUzcq-jiE

So I don't make much of it Anon, but I did find the clips entertaining (if a little too obvious) and debunking them made me feel sad about how shitty humans are, where they will constantly lie to each other.

File: 1.jpg (458KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 1024x768px

>>18840714
watch this video and tell me what you see!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6sYgD9h_k4

>>18840714
>If Ghosts are real, why do we still have no tangible proof?
Because ghosts aren't tangible ya dingus